Polearm vs. Axe/Mace AND Spear?

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

Why doesn't the lack of symmetry bother anyone else?

For me, there are a few reasons:

- because the system works pretty well in actual play, although you get some judgment calls necessary on edge cases.

- the system divisions on the main cases and edge cases alike are arbitrary, but I feel that any set of weapon groupings will be equally arbitrary.

- I don't see symmetry as a useful design goal in and of itself.

- I don't think GURPS really needs more weapon skills in actual practice. I'd be in favor of merging a few of them rather than breaking them up further.


That second point is big for me - why should I exchange one set of arbitrary rules for another set of arbitrary rules? Because of symmetry? Because of one-handed polearm users (talk about an edge case)? I just don't see what that would do for me except make my life more complicated for no actual increase in fun.

So that's why I don't really care about symmetry.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Bruno

Technically there's a third variable - "Flexible or rigid" for whips, flails, and such.

Where I to rejigger the combat skills, I'd drop the one/twohanded variable, and look seriously at the cluster of pick/axe/mace/spear/polearm/staff skills. This is a big muddle of hafted weapons.

What I might do is create some sort of "torque" figure, basically the weight of the weapon multiplied by its reach on the hitting end of the grip.

You'd have a figure relative to your striking ST (hitting torque) and lifting ST (total weight), and that would tell what penalties you'd suffer to re-ready after an attack.

Defensive grip would give a huge bonus to re-ready.

You'd have thrust and swing skills.

Familiarity or technique would take care of pointy, edged, and blunt impactors.

Etc.

[Flyndaran]

This thread has taught me that I do have an odd intense like of symmetry even when it doesn't really matter. You would think I would know myself after being with myself for 37 years. What else have I been hiding... from myself?

[Bruno]

Do you know for sure this is a lifelong trait, and that it extends anywhere beyond some game design principles? You may not have been "hiding anything from yourself" beyond a little quirk in a very narrow area.

Or you were perfectly aware of it and just oblivious to other people not sharing this trait.

My quirk-level neurosis about coloured candy is VERY specific. It's just coloured candies that triggers it, not other kinds of coloured foods, or other brightly coloured objects. Search me why. But because I'm aware I have it, I know not to make the mistake of buying a one kilo bulk bag of Willy Wonka Nerds - I would be sorting and counting them for HOURS. :P

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by Bruno

Technically there's a third variable - "Flexible or rigid" for whips, flails, and such.

Where I to rejigger the combat skills, I'd drop the one/twohanded variable, and look seriously at the cluster of pick/axe/mace/spear/polearm/staff skills. This is a big muddle of hafted weapons.

I'd be inclined to put picks, axes and hammers into one category (all three require the head to be oriented correctly when striking) and maces, knobbly clubs, and the like into another, easier category with a friendly inter-default (no concern about rotation of the haft).

Spear and staff can be smashed together. (squish)

I would leave polearms separate from axes/maces, but the skill wouldn't cover thrusting. Thrusting would be covered by spear/staff (As would butt strikes), but polearm and spear/staff would have a very friendly inter-default.

Polearms are distinct from the axe/mace/pick group in that they have the long counterweight of the haft behind the wielders grip, and the working edges of the heads hug close to the shaft, to try and minimize how "unbalanced" they are (not the gurps term). A one-handed "Polearm" would need the same design - counterweight haft and close-hugging striking surface.

Polearm is basically a transitional form between pick/axe/mace and sword - it's "More better balanced" than an axe and so can have a thrusting component in the skill (at the small default penalty to staff/spear", but isn't as well balanced as a sword.

Someone who takes a regular war axe or hatchet and sticks a spike on the end could use it with the polearm skill, but they'd be at a penalty all the time for both thrusting and swinging, as it's a terrible polearm.

Personally I would:
- Remove the "special ethnic" skills like Jitte-Sai (subsumed into Knife) or Lance (becomes a technique)
- Add Lance (thrusting with one-handed balanced hafted weapons) (E) and Pike (thrusting with two-handed hafted weapons) (E). Possibly still allow Spear (A) at a default to them.
- Simplify fencing skills. Seriously consider and define what it is about a style that gives it the "fencing parry" and whether eg. Lance and Pike should have this benefit.
- Add more defaults. All one handed, rigid weapons should default to each other at around -4; the same goes for two-handed rigid ones.
- Ignore that silliness about Art and Sport versions of ranged weapon skills, except for "weapon-like-objects" like paintball guns. Someone who wants to be good at target shooting, or spinning a gun around, can get a technique for that.

We have a lot of historical advice that if you must learn one two-handed staff weapon, the staff is the best choice. I think there is something to be said for giving styles which keep the point in line different benefits from ones which keep the point out of line, and possibly overlapping this with the fencing parry.

The trouble with knobbed clubs is that many do have a definite striking end. Think tomahawk or golf club.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Polydamas

Personally I would:
- Remove the "special ethnic" skills like Jitte-Sai (subsumed into Knife) or Lance (becomes a technique)

The trick about this one is that the "special" skill nature of this reflects the ability to capture your foe's weapon with the prongs. I discussed some of this with Kromm during the Technical Grappling playtest, when I ran into a brief WTF? moment with the techniques to bind weapons (one of the advertised chunks of TG from the Call for Playtesters is a ground-up look at grappling with weapons).

Now, you still may be right, and what is needed is to make Knife, Main-Gauche, and Jitte/Sai into one skill, and just give bonuses to Parry or Bind based on weapon construction, and if you want to be good at them, you buy up relevant techniques. But the Jitte/Sai is a bit less "ethnic badass" than it is "sorta hidden very real boost to a few specific techniques."

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Now, you still may be right, and what is needed is to make Knife, Main-Gauche, and Jitte/Sai into one skill, and just give bonuses to Parry or Bind based on weapon construction, and if you want to be good at them, you buy up relevant techniques. But the Jitte/Sai is a bit less "ethnic badass" than it is "sorta hidden very real boost to a few specific techniques."

It it not really a ethic weapon skill either any more the Main-Gauche is. for Jitte/Sai also covers western pronged daggers what do the same thing.

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Now, you still may be right, and what is needed is to make Knife, Main-Gauche, and Jitte/Sai into one skill, and just give bonuses to Parry or Bind based on weapon construction, and if you want to be good at them, you buy up relevant techniques. But the Jitte/Sai is a bit less "ethnic badass" than it is "sorta hidden very real boost to a few specific techniques."

That would match how Polearm works. Also, a popular gadget in early modern Europe was a dagger which split into a three-toothed fork for trapping and breaking weapons when a button was pressed. I suspect that its not realistic to compel 17th century fencers to buy a whole new skill for their toy ... a Perk might be reasonable. Other than the twist to lock a weapon, is there any movement in a Jitte style which isn't used in a "stabbing dagger" style?

The problem is that creating a natural set of skills requires knowledge of all weapons, and many common gaming weapons (like Axe) have no historical or traditional arts. This is why I wouldn't mind some overlap, to let players buy a set of weapons which could be trained together as one skill.

[aesir23]

Originally Posted by Polydamas

The problem is that creating a natural set of skills requires knowledge of all weapons, and many common gaming weapons (like Axe) have no historical or traditional arts.

What do you mean by this? The axe was a very common weapon among Vikings, Franks and other dark age Europeans, and there are certainly many axes made specifically for combat available from the high middle ages and later.

I hardly think that you can say that the axe has "no historical or traditional arts".

[Kalzazz]

I've read that people use the top of the blade on a tomahawk both to jab and make tip slashes with, and that sometimes part of the backside was sharpened for this, nothing about spikes though

Not sure how effective this would be if at all